Rigor, Relevance & Relationships

I have recently become intrigued by the work of the International Center for Leadership in Education on the importance of "Rigor, Relevance and Relationships" in our public schools. Their basic premise is that a focus on these new "Three R's" is the key to lasting and substantive school improvement. The more I read and ponder this model for school improvement, the more I believe in their simple, yet powerful, premise.

As an administrator, I have been in the classrooms of teachers who had a complete grasp of their subject matter, and took great pride in the fact that their classes were quite rigorous. I have also been in classrooms where the teacher had a tremendously positive relationship with the students, and the kids seemed to enjoy being in the class, but very little learning was going on. However, neither of these classrooms were optimal learning environments.

The optimal learning environment is when "Rigor, Relevance, and Relationships" are all accounted for and appreciated within the classroom. Let's take a moment to examine each of these variables and how they might look in the classroom.

Too often, rigor is viewed through the lens of how much homework the teacher requires and how many hours the student has to study to prepare for a test. However, it doesn't take a master teacher to have a "hard class" (anyone can do that), but it does take a master teacher to have a truly rigorous class. Rigor should be thought of in terms how often we require our students to solve complex problems, apply what they have learned, and critically analyze the results. The focus of rigor should be on helping the students develop a deeper understanding of the subject matter that goes beyond memorizing, reciting and restating. The development of critical thinking skills is paramount to "rigor". Teachers shouldn't take pride in the fact that a student has to do two hours of homework per night and study three days for tests in order to pass their class. In fact, absent the true "rigor" of higher-order thinking skills, this could be considered poor teaching practice.

All educators have heard the phrase, "Why do I have to learn this? I'll never use it again." If students have to ask this question, then "relevance" is missing in the classroom. Relevance refers to how the subject matter relates to the student's interests and needs. Real relevance cannot be developed unless students are allowed to utilize their learning in real-life situations and contexts. When this is considered, it is easy to see how "rigor" and "relevance" begin to overlap. When students are allowed to apply their learning to real-world situations (relevance), they are required to use higher-order thinking skills (rigor). Therefore, true rigor is very difficult to attain in the absence of relevance, and vice versa.

Although "rigor" and "relevance" are keys to meaningful student learning, this learning cannot occur in the absence of "relationships" in the school. Kids cannot learn if their social and emotional needs have not been satisfied. We can have the most rigorous and relevant classrooms in the country, but if our kids' affective needs are not being met, we will not be successful. In a school focused on relationships, there is a caring, student-centered environment where students feel a sense of connection to their school. Many schools have realized the importance of this variable, and have tried to account for it through the development of the "school within a school" concept. In this structure, interdisciplinary teams are developed and groups of students are assigned to each team. Others have adopted an "advisory" structure, where each teacher is assigned a small group of students. Other schools have not adopted a new structure, but instead have simply determined that the development of meaningful relationships with students would be their focus. In response, their teachers have tried to attend more student events, eat lunch with the students, open their rooms before and after school, start new clubs/organization, etc. These schools understood that all the "rigor" and "relevance" in the world would not make a difference in the absence of meaningful "relationships."

If the model of "Rigor, Relevance and Relationships" was applied to District #1, how do you think we would measure up? In what areas are we strong? In what areas is there room for improvement? What needs to be done to improve? I would enjoy hearing your thoughts.